Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- APA (1)
- Administrative procedures (1)
- Auer Deference (1)
- Chevron Deference (1)
- Cy pres (1)
-
- Expository reasoning (1)
- Hoffman Plastic Compounds (1)
- INA (1)
- INS (1)
- IRCA (1)
- Immigration (1)
- Immigration Nationality Act (1)
- Immigration Reform and Control Act (1)
- Immigration and Nationality Act; Board of Immigration Appeals; immigration law; Void-for-Vagueness Doctrine; due process; Valenzuela Gallardo v. Lynch; Sessions v. Dimaya; temporal nexus requirement (1)
- Immigration and Naturalization Service (1)
- Inc. v. N.L.R.B (1)
- Interpretation (1)
- Interpretive rules (1)
- Labor Law (1)
- Legislative rules (1)
- Mezonos Maven Bakery (1)
- NLRA (1)
- NLRB (1)
- National Labor Relations Act (1)
- National Labor Relations Board (1)
- Policymaking (1)
- Prescriptive reasoning (1)
- Seminole Rock Deference (1)
- Skidmore deference (1)
- Undocumented immigration (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Alternative Remedies For Undocumented Workers Left Behind In A Post-Hoffman Plastic Era, Rachel S. Steber
Alternative Remedies For Undocumented Workers Left Behind In A Post-Hoffman Plastic Era, Rachel S. Steber
Catholic University Law Review
Congress enacted the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) in 1935 in order to level the bargaining power of employees and employers to prevent burdening the flow of commerce and depressing workers’ wages. The NLRA vests the administration of promulgating the goals of the NLRA in the National Labor Relations Board (Board), broadly stating that the Board should take such affirmative action as necessary to effectuate the policies of the Act.
In 1935, however, Congress could not predict the future demographic makeup of the American workforce, and in its definition of an “employee” as covered under the NLRA, the statute makes …
Crystal Clear Vagueness: The Board Of Immigration Appeals Hampers Justice With Its Vague “Process Of Justice”, Maria Natera
Crystal Clear Vagueness: The Board Of Immigration Appeals Hampers Justice With Its Vague “Process Of Justice”, Maria Natera
Catholic University Law Review
The Immigration and Nationality Act has caused the issue of unconstitutional vagueness to become more prominent in recent years in the context of immigration law. The Act provides definitions for certain crimes that are grounds for legal immigrants to be placed in removal proceedings, with the possibility of deportation. With such severe potential consequences, it is crucial that the definitions be crystal clear on what every crime entails in order to give immigrants fair warning.
One such crime that may subject an immigrant to removal proceedings and deportation is a conviction for an “aggravated felony,” coupled with a sentence of …
Auer Deference Should Be Dead; Long Live Seminole Rock Deference, John B. Meisel
Auer Deference Should Be Dead; Long Live Seminole Rock Deference, John B. Meisel
Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology
Deference doctrines should be understood in light of the Administrative Procedures Act’s distinction between legislative rules and interpretive rules and should be based on a solid theoretical foundation. Modern Auer deference calls for categorical deference for an agency’s regulatory interpretation of an ambiguous regulation. This is inconsistent with the APA’s characterization of the purpose of an interpretive rule. Properly construed, interpretive rules clarify the meaning of a legal text which should be justified by use of expository reasoning. These rules deserve a lesser form of deference (Skidmore deference), based on an agency’s unique understanding of its own regulations which …